Former ATF Gun Tech Chief Rick Vasquez warns that the ATF’s current push to ban bump stocks will open the door to other bans
A legislative push to ban bump stocks lost steam within a month of the October 1, 2017, Las Vegas attack. The public simply did not rally behind the gun control campaign. This left the ruling class no option but to take the regulatory route and seek bump stock gun control via ATF edict.
On December 22, 2017, Breitbart News reported that the ATF was formulating a redefinition of “machineguns” so that the term would cover “machineguns” and non-machineguns as well. Gun controllers have to do this because a bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic firearm into a “machinegun.”
The ATF’s former gun tech chief is warning that efforts to redefine “machineguns,” for the the purposes of banning bump stocks, will only lead to more bans. He told the Military News Channel, “So ATF’s been directed to write a regulation with the strength of a law.” He said the advance notice copy of the new rule makes clear that the ATF’s new regulation will ban “any device that automatically resets a firearm and enhances the rate of fire.” He added, “That is extremely broad.”
Vasquez observed, “They are trying to target binary triggers, [bump stock] devices, and other devices, but that is such broad language, can I take that to a Gatling gun? …So now you start stretching this [new] definition, and who is going to decide what the [standard] rate of fire is?” In other words, Vasquez is saying a this new ban simply opens the door to “stretching” the language to cover other devices, as the ruling class sees fit.
Vasquez also stressed that there will be no “grandfather clause” with a new ATF bump stock ban. This means individuals who refuse to turn over a bump stocks will immediately become a “prohibited person.”
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing a change whereby the definition of “machinegun” would be broadened to include bump stocks.
This change would subsequently bring bump stocks under the purview of the same National Firearms Act (1934) and Gun Control Act of 1968 regulations that currently govern machinegun sales and possession.
The DOJ has released a draft of the announcement of the proposed definition expansion. It is similar to numerous Democrat gun control proposals that followed the Las Vegas attack inasmuch the new definition would ban numerous firearm accessories in addition to bump stocks. The title of letter conveying the DOJ’s announcement says it all: Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks and Other Similar Devices.
If the DOJ succeeds in redefining “machinegun,” it portends a scenario in which individuals who own bump stocks will be required to undergo background checks and a registration process to legally retrain the devices. And if the guidelines for “machinegun” ownership hold true, owners of bump stocks would also have to be fingerprinted, photographed, and pay a $200 tax to the federal government.
My take: The ATF succeeded in redefining Streetsweeper shotguns as destructive devices even though they were in common use at the time. Bump stocks are history.
They still represent an anti-Second Amendment agency that rules by fiat.
I know they haven’t won every push, but knowing what we know about their past behavior I don’t see any reason to think they won’t ban bump stocks if they wish.
My biggest issue is the fact that ATF “regulations” fly in the face of our legislative process. Congress is supposed to create law and the executive branch, under which the ATF falls as a law enforcement agency, is only supposed to enforce said laws.
If Congress can’t pass a ban, no such ban need exist.
All I see is something in the vein as retired generals and colonels on Fox News saying how we are all gonna die. Yawn
When SecDef Mattis says “Hey man, get ready for some Red Dawn mess” then my ears may yet prick.
Half of people think the ATF are crusaders disarming terrorists (not totally), the other half think they are Frankfurt School Alum who are plotting to grab all the guns (not totally)…
When in reality most are out doing cigarette and liquor inventories and shagging gun store paperwork. They are FAR from the Waffen SS. They aren’t jackbooted master race with Blood Daggers marching in perfect unison singing Victoria at the top of their lungs. Go watch a FLETC class. I promise you, you will say “THIS is the boogeyman?!”
I think their head shed is a bunch bureaucrats justifying their position and less people bitch about guns than smokes and booze (although cigarettes ARE more expensive thanks to the ATF).
Again, I dont want anything banned but I doubt you will see much past bump stocks. Braces are safe because amputees gotta shoot too and a Federal AWB just wont happen at this juncture. More efficacy at the State level which, hey, is actually MORE Constitutional (even if I disagree with the bans) than a Federal ban. States Rights and all.
BUT the ATF hasn’t acted upon bumpfire yet. I remember the Saiga 12 scare and wanting to make it a DD and folks were screeching about their moley labias and yet, Saiga 12s are still to be had. Same with 855. Dudes were painting bullet meplats green and selling them for a dollar a round. Nothing happened.
Y’all can get your panties in a twist but not The Kid.
This is why I said they haven’t won every push. The outcry against the ban on M855 may very well have turned the tide. Hence…this…thread…might…inspire…similar…pushback.
ARE YA WITH ME, SO FAR?
I know bump stocks are less than “meh” to most people familiar with firearms. Still, don’t give any ground. None. Not one inch.
Like the articles pointed out: what is it tomorrow?
Standard capacity feeding devices sure enhance the rate of fire, don’t they? All you have to do is stretch it a little bit. It’s not that much of a stretch to think that a 30-round mag is tomorrow’s “machine gun” if the regulations are worded deliberately vaguely.
Hey Doc., I’m for this./\above…
I mean, what’s next, are they going to go after our Pants that have Belt loops? HUMMM, Next thing to ban:rolleyes:
You guys ever Try or Seen others, who use their belt loops to do the samething as the Bump firestock?
FWIW: I have no interests, ever, in buying one of these even IF I could, I work too hard for my $$$ to piss my rounds away like that.
But they use “regulation” as a loophole to the legislative process. I would imagine, theoretically, they could institute a blanket ban on all privately owned firearms simply by redefining them under already-agreed upon “reasonable” bans. Basically like this:
-The entirety of guns can’t be banned per the 2nd Amendment as well as DC v. Heller, McDonald v. Chicago, etc.
-Court decisions, Hughes Amendment, NFA of 34, GCA of 68, and others, however, rule that machine guns can be regulated, and even banned completely.
-The ATF gets to define what is a machine gun and what is not.
-They change the definition of “machine gun” to include ALL firearms: Full auto, semi auto, revolver, manually operated, breach loaded single shot, black powder revolvers, muzzle loaded rifles, paintball guns, airsoft guns, cap guns, red rubber training guns, sandwiches bit into the shape of a gun…hell, you want to ban bows and arrows? Redefine them as machine guns.
-As soon as some company comes up with a new mechanism that doesn’t fall under the ban, immediately add that to the definition.
The main reason I’m posting this is due to this quote right here, given by one of the antis involved.
Rosenthal says that should not be an excuse to hold on to an illegal device. “These are devices that are designed to kill a lot of people quickly, and I’m not sure that we ought to be compensating people for giving up these devices that never should have been purchased in the first place,” he said.
I just found this line so unbelievably infuriating I had to call attention to it.
Regardless of whether this guy thinks they shouldn’t have been purchased in the first place, they were purchased, legally.
His quote seems to imply that those who purchased bumpstocks with their own money are such morally deficient people for having done so, that they deserve to be denied the monetary value of their confiscated property as some sort of punishment.
It goes without saying that I don’t share his views on bumpstocks themselves (I just think they are stupid, but hey, spend your money on what you want), but his advocacy for the government being able to just take citizens’ property without compensation is equally loathesome to me.
Personally I find it more interested that many people haven’t already grasped the fact that these people think like this…
Of course you should give everything up unquestionably and without thought of recompense, of course you should be ashamed of yourself for owning something or thinking a certain way if it’s been deemed “offensive” or “dangerous” by your moral betters. If you own a gun, you deserve to get shot, if you voted “R” you deserve to get beaten up by packs of hooligans…and on and on.
Hence that quote-
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
The original plan has, and always will be “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in…”
No buy-backs, compensations, grandfather-clauses or additions to a restricted format. Never forget that.
[/choir_preaching_v.02.05.018]
I hope those are the only ones anyone ever turns in.
BFYTW.
I think we need to realize that the part of the 5th Amendment that says “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;” just doesn’t exist in places like MA, NJ, NY, CT, MD and CA
There are plenty of select fire weapons coming up from south of the border.
What is Mr. Rosenthal gonna do about that? Pass another law?
I have no real dog in it in the cosmic sense, but if Mr. Rosenthal feels so passionate about it. I challenge him to personally deprive others of their property.
It was. We aren’t a Democracy. We are a Republic. As such we elect people who pull these stunts. Because most people are lazy and dont consider who they vote for.
